limaxophobiacq

F&C isn't supposed to give a deflection bonus according to wiki According to the in game description it is though.

Screen shot attached. I noticed this on my own character with Zealous Focus but with my companions it also seems to happen with effects from gear as well as you can see here. Not sure what's caused it.

Paladins: -Orders are cool, but unclear exactly what behaviour is encouraged/discouraged by your order, had to look up wiki to be sure. -No good feedback on how well you're folliwing said behaviour, you start with a +10 Faith and Conviction bonus but with no idea if that's good or bad -Intellect doesn't seem to affect Paladin abilities? (AoE of auras, duration of other abilties like Liberating Exhortations) Edit: Actually seems to affect durations when you actually use them but its not displayed in the description. Doesn't seem to affect aura AoE at all though. Edit2: Turns out its not my defense thats low, after making some non-paladins who ended up with worse deflection, it seems its my NPCs deflection values that are weirdly high.

It's not veryh clear which one I should use for this though.

First, why is my deflection so godawful? It says in character creation Paladins are a class with High deflection but in game it's worse than the wizards and far worse than the clerics and this is with Faith and Conviction giving me a +10 bonus. Speaking of that +10 bonus, there is no indication of if that's a high or low number? Is it the maximum bonus? An average one? A poor one? Displaying a scale with best to worst possible bonus and showing where on it you are would be appreciated. Also it would be nice if what you had to do to act in accordance with your order was more explicit, I had to look up the wiki to be sure.

Not sure if this is a bug or just poor documentation but I tried making 2 paladins, one with Intellect 14 and one with Intellect 4 and both their Liberating Exhortations had the same duratio (15 seconds) and their auras (Zealus Focus etc.) seemed to have the exact same area of effect. If this isn't a bug it should at least be documented in the description of intellect what abilities actually get the increased duration and area of effect. Edit: Seems its only when you mouse over the ability that it doesn't show the increased duration? Because it has longer duration than the description says when I actually use it. Aura AoE does truly seem unaffected though.

A mode I wont use untill I'm sure any and all potentially game-ending bugs have been fixed.

RPG adventurers generally live their lives like murderhobos (http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Murder_hobos), I enjoy that this time we'll have a character who actually looks the part. IMO most adventurers look far too well-adjusted for the kind of life they lead.

For one thing, given possible splitt stamina/hp system it's possible resting will always fully restore the former and not the later, and secondly losing hp might, just like in dnd, not really represent physical damage to your body.

With Avellone on the writing team I think there's going to be enough ire towards tired fantasy cliches in the game without us adding to it.

I don't really know how nitty-gritty armour needs to be or if giving weapons different effectiveness against armour in general is a good idea. I mean, realistically, if you have the tech to make good plate (which PE seems to have), all other armour is pretty much simply inferior, and if you want lighter armour you wear lighter plate or only a breatsplate and helmet or the like. And while you'll never actually cut through plate swinging a sword at it (mostly you'll just deal blunt trauma), you could, realistically, thrust using a half-sword grip but I sincerely doubt fighting will be that detailed, so making swords crap against armour for the sake or realism might make them less effective than they should realistically be because it doesn't take into account other aspects of fighting the game doesn't consider.

If it was a combination of subtraction and % reduction (and possibly deflection), I think the subtraction would have to be before the % reduction, or characters could probably get ridiculously though. I'm a bit sceptical to the need for having a seperate deflection stat for armour, assuming subtracting armour wouldn't a glancing blow just be represented by a low damage roll that gets completely absorbed by the armour?

Pretty self-explanatory I think. Personally I'm for straight subtraction or a combination of subtraction & % of damage, though in the later still weighed more toward subtraction than multiplication than the old Fallouts were. (I think armour in Fallout 1-2 also reduces the chance you'll take damage but while I don't actually know the exact mechanics it feels like a fairly minor effect.)

I don't really think it's possible to state it as simply as a ratio. I mean I'm fine with something like Crom Faeyr being in the game as long as it feels like something rare and special and the game isn't balanced around having it, and comparing fighting with Crom Faeyr to using a regular un-enhanced warhammer is a pretty gigantic difference, but it doesn't make you feel like your character just exists for the gear to have someone to carry it around.

Meaning: I'd rather my character actually be a strong warrior (or whatever) and not have all his/her power come from having awesome gear. A good example of what I don't want is something like skyrim where without magic weapons and armour made from super-materials your supposedly great warrior character is actually a worse fighter than the average city-guard if they have the same stuff. The old IE games did this pretty well and I hope it is something that doesn't change. Edit: No way to edit topic (for spelling, obviously)?

I enjoyed a load of fetch-quests in Torment like all the stuff you have to get the girls in the brothel just because the things you fetch are cool and the characters and conversation is so great.

Hmh, you might be right there. Kate Perry license probably costs a lot, wouldn't be surprised if it's not millions. The games itself are probably cheap to make but all other expenses are very high. I have no idea about the cost of making the core Sims games but the 10+ expansions they release for every one are probably close to zero effort compared to what they make from them.

Personally I think the question of your own 'choice' vs. being determined by your soul is kind of moot, just as I think the whole determinism vs. free will debate is kind of meaningless. IMO you are free to decide what you want but given that what you are is a part of a deterministic system your free choice is also deterministic. That your self in PE also includes a soul doesn't change that. I guess some people might choose to view their soul as not being part of their selves*, but I can't imagine it being common and I personally sure wouldn't (but then I believe the idea of a self is an idea of a system and that it like all system what is considered external and external to the system is basically arbitrary, so I guess on a philosophical level I'd say the idea of a self is an illusion). *Like how some people sometimes view what most would consider parts of themselves as external at times, like f.ex. you can view your sex-drive as an almost external influence driving you to do a bunch of stupid ****.

Undoubtably Planescape: Torment. The Mass Effects are deffinately RPGs, they offer about as much choice as BG 1-2 , NWN 1-2, and KOTOR 1-2 do. The 'RPG mechanics' are certainly pretty light at least in 2 and 3 but there are plently of PnP RPGs that have very light systems and that doesn't make them any less RPGs.

They said they could make a game in the spirit of the old IE games for 1.1 million and they got nearly 4 times that. If they can't make it with 4.1 they are either liars or idiots, so I guess we just have to have to trust that they are not.

It was linked on 4chans /v/ideogames board, which even the rest of that hive of scum and villany finds pretty loathsome.

Is there anywhere you can check what the current paypal total for the kickstarter is? If not what was the last word on it we got?

That's why I said High Medieval era. Most generic fantasy settings use dark ages as the backdrop. But they also tend to use late medieval plate armour which actually post-dates the invention of firearms (or at least cannons).

What's your reason for disliking the MotB ending? Was it the crusade not really going anywhere or getting anything accomplished which I guess was kind of anticlimatic or something else? I personally found it pretty satisfying still, the endless fights against Melissan in ToB not so much.

Urgh. That is possibly my least-liked fight in all the IE games. Outside of some masochistic Path of the Damned mode every fight in the game should be possible to beat on the first try without using any OOC knowledge as long as you've mastered the game mechanics, and that fight is the exact opposite; you're practically required to face it and die to learn how the fight works and then come up with tactics (and even then there's a decent chance bad luck will kill you).